2010 elections

[Highlander]

Is that the sound a sheep makes?

One day, X was making out with his girlfriend behind a big tree in his backyard. Things were really getting steamy and then he turned around and saw his girlfriend's mother standing over top of them. He stopped what he was doing and pulled his pants up. Then his girlfriend's mother had a few words for him........."Baaahaahaahaaah."

 

[PsyOps]

Is that the sound a sheep makes?

Nope. It's the official anthem of the democrat party:

 

[RadioPatrol]

After two years of democrat idiocy, will the republicans be able to point at the democrats ignorance and regain control, or will the minnions still be so glued to the o's backside that they will vote blindly without concern for the country as they did this time.

Choice # 3 ... Dems retain control, because VOTERS are Stupid

 

[Xaquin44]

We can always count on you for a deep, intellectual retort.

sorry if you don't like me laughing at your stupidity.

/shrug

 

[PsyOps]

sorry if you don't like me laughing at your stupidity.

/shrug

I accept that, devoid of any real intelligent argument because you fail to grasp the issue at hand, laughter is all you have left.

 

[Tilted]

I think the most likely scenario is that the Democrats will retain control of both houses.

Looking at the Senate, it is almost impossible to fathom how the Republicans could regain control in 2010. I'd even say that it is unlikely that they will gain any seats at all. Of the 34 seats that will be contested, 15 are currently held by Democrats and 19 are currently held by Republicans. Out of those 15 Democratic seats, only a handful will even be in play, barring some kind of cataclysmic shift in political landscape. I would say that Republicans only have a reasonable shot at 4 of them, and only a plausible shot at 7. On the flip side, the Democrats might have a reasonable shot at 8 Republican seats, and a plausible shot at 12 of them. Tactically, it's just very hard to see the GOP gaining ground there, and all but inconceivable that they would gain 9 or 10 net seats. It's likely that they will struggle to hold on to filibuster power.

The House is usually more up for grabs, since all the seats are contested. If the right political winds blow, the Republicans could certainly make some gains there - but it is still hard to imagine that they would regain control.

If I had to guess though, I'd guess that the Democrats maintain, if not increase their advantages in both houses. The timing of economic cycles is likely to play perfectly in their favor. By the time the mid terms get here, we will have seen improving economic conditions and there will be enough who believe they are the result of Democratic policies. People capable of objective, critical analysis just don't represent a large enough portion of the population to overcome those who aren't.

Early prediction for 2010 - Dems get to 258 in the House and 61 in the Senate.

Of course, anything can happen between now and then.

 

[Larry Gude]

I
Early prediction for 2010 - Dems get to 258 in the House and 61 in the Senate.

Of course, anything can happen between now and then.

There is NO way Obama avoids loses in both chambers mid term. The GOP has life and energy and, simply by looking at the reaction to the pork bill, there is very little trust of or patience for Pelosi or Reid OR Obama. This should have been a slam dunk first major piece of legislation for all three.

To use a basketball metaphor, Obama had a weak shot in the lane swatted into the stands.

He has already thrown away the advantage of his approval ratings over congress's and not only did he let them write the mess, they did it with his blessing.

On top of that, if he makes too many deals with the GOP to get their support, they will be seen as the adults in the room and that provides more support for GOP gains.

This administration is already on the rocks and it is going to be seen, rightly, as his shortcomings.

He seriously needs the GOP to over play their hand.

It's Steeles job to prevent that.

 

[Tilted]

There is NO way Obama avoids loses in both chambers mid term. The GOP has life and energy and, simply by looking at the reaction to the pork bill, there is very little trust of or patience for Pelosi or Reid OR Obama. This should have been a slam dunk first major piece of legislation for all three.

To use a basketball metaphor, Obama had a weak shot in the lane swatted into the stands.

He has already thrown away the advantage of his approval ratings over congress's and not only did he let them write the mess, they did it with his blessing.

On top of that, if he makes too many deals with the GOP to get their support, they will be seen as the adults in the room and that provides more support for GOP gains.

This administration is already on the rocks and it is going to be seen, rightly, as his shortcomings.

He seriously needs the GOP to over play their hand.

It's Steeles job to prevent that.

I certainly hope you are right, but I have serious doubts. One thing playing in the GOP's favor is the nature of the mid-term. The Democratic candidates got a bit of a tailwind from the energy of Obama's supporters, and the relative apathy of McCain's 'supporters', in the last election. That effect probably won't be as large in 2010, since Obama won't be on any ballots.

However, I still think that the general sensation of people's economic outlooks seeming brighter in 18 months is going to be hard to overcome.

As far as the Senate in particular, you should look at the specific races that will be contested and try to figure out where the GOP can gain seats, and where they could possibly lose seats. From a tactical standpoint, the Senate is going to be tough for Republicans in 2010.

 

[Larry Gude]

I certainly hope you are right, but I have serious doubts. One thing playing in the GOP's favor is the nature of the mid-term. The Democratic candidates got a bit of a tailwind from the energy of Obama's supporters, and the relative apathy of McCain's 'supporters', in the last election. That effect probably won't be as large in 2010, since Obama won't be on any ballots.

However, I still think that the general sensation of people's economic outlooks seeming brighter in 18 months is going to be hard to overcome.
Does Obama have the confidence in the House bill to pass it without GOP support? If not, that happy feeling in 18 months is going to reward the GOP, greatly, for having shown Obama the light. This week is HIGH stakes.

As far as the Senate in particular, you should look at the specific races that will be contested and try to figure out where the GOP can gain seats, and where they could possibly lose seats. From a tactical standpoint, the Senate is going to be tough for Republicans in 2010.

You are right about the Senate, BUT,the thing is, mid terms can be volatile. 'Safe seat' can be oxymoronic. Steels gotta find shooters no matter what.

 

[Larry Gude]

I certainly hope you are right, but I have serious doubts.

Full disclosure; I swore up and down Steele was gonna beat Cardin, easy.

 

[Tilted]

Full disclosure; I swore up and down Steele was gonna beat Cardin, easy.

In any other year or in most other states, he would have. He was a very good candidate and ran a great campaign.

He just got swept under by an ideologically liberal tidal wave, in a left-leaning state, which would have been nearly impossible to withstand. It's unfortunate that the timing worked out so badly for him, because I thought that Senate seat was going to be a stepping stone to big things.

His ads during that campaign were probably, on the whole, the best political ads I can remember.

 

[SamSpade]

If Mikulski is tapped for Health and Human Services, there's an outside chance that a weak replacement might be found.